I am using a Kingston 64GB SSDNow V SSD 2.5" SATA-II drive as a replacement in my MSI Wind U90. You will read many reviews on-line telling you that this drive is no better than a high-end SATA desktop drive. This is true, however it is a lot faster than the 4200rpm drive it replaces (booting is about 10s quicker overall), it is silent, it doesn't impart odd gyroscopic effects spinning up (because, of course, it doesn't spin up) and it wasn't as expensive as the high performance drives which a netbook doesn't really have the power to take full advantage of.

If it were me, I'd wait a while. At the moment SSD's are just getting to the sizes to make them realistic alternatives, however they're still not mainstream yet. There is more innovation and costs savings to be had yet. I'd save the money for now, or buy a bigger monitor or something.

Notice on this site, it starts off by saying that seek times on SSDs are about 100 times faster than a conventional HDD, but then goes on to quote data transfer rates that are only just over twice as fast (hence my expectation of reducing times by about half isn't too far off from their figures).
Other sites give comparisons of HDD and SSD performance in the same machine (you can google around if you want to), the best figures I have seen for software loading times are about one third of the original time. Presumably limiting factors of processor, motherboard and RAM speeds and resource availability will not allow SSDs to achieve the maximum theoretical performance they are capable of. I'm not sure what the maximum speed of the SATA interface (I think we're up to the third revision now) is, but in the end that's always going to be a limiting factor.

LeeNukes wrote:I'd recommend checking the speed though, write and read as they vary wildly from drive to drive. I'd hate for you to part with your money and find spending an extra £20-30 would have gotten you true SSD speeds.

I did suggest double checking the speeds. Is this one of the higher performing SSDs.